Talk:Celestial Intervention Agency

Doctor Who Low‑importance

	Doctor Who portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Celestis?

I know this is book canon, but how are the Celestial Intervention Agency and Celestis related? Oh, and isn't the CIA in the comic books somewhere?

The Celestis are the CIA of the future War in Heaven, who remove themselves to Mictlan to escape it. I can't remember off-hand where the CIA shows up in the comic strips, if at all. --khaosworks 14:43, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

It could be that I am confusing the High Evolutionaries in the Tides of Time comic with the CIA. But surely there must be some connection...Travlr23 12:09, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A connection with the High Evolutionaries and the CIA? Doubtful, considering that the CIA are an active agency within the Time Lords, and the Evolutionaries seemed more like the Black and White Guardians, and included Merlin (not the Doctor version and not a Time Lord) and Rassilon (dead or in the Matrix). There's no evidence on this score. --khaosworks 18:14, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

Which reminds me, would it be good to have entries for Merlin (who is supposedly the Doctor in the future, right? the entry could reference back to Battlefield), the Black and White Guardians (isn't there a Red Guardian?), and the Evolutionaries. Even though a few of those are only found in the comics, in "Enlightenment" there are also Eternals. I really think we should go all out with putting everything in Doctor Who (tv canon or book) into wikipedia. Is that wrong? I do intend on writing these articles, if it's cool with you... --Travlr23 22:17, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I know I've been a bit proprietory about stuff and I apologise. It's just that I've put so much work into making the pages up to a particular standard that I feel overprotecttive sometimes. Certainly, I can't stop you from writing them up if you want, but I would just suggest, friendly-like, that you write only if you're confident of putting in enough accurate detail to get it up to non-stub level. The problem with a lot of these is that we know very little about them, and the question is not comprehensiveness but whether it's really useful or notable. Not every little thing or character needs to be listed. For example, would an entry on the Eternals add anything beyond what we already see in Enlightenment? To be honest, I think our time would be better served concentrating on getting rid of the stubs we do have - especially the serial synopses - rather than creating new ones. We already have a entry on the Black Guardian, in case you didn't know. --khaosworks 22:41, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

Stub

Is this article actually a stub? Is there any more information about the CIA which could be included? --bjwebb 09:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. There could be a discussion about how fans speculate that the CIA is behind a lot of the stuff that the Time Lords get the Doctor to do in the series, as well as the heavy role they play in the novels. --khaosworks 09:38, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be a good idea to mention all the books/tv serials where the CIA is mentioned... or implied... --Travlr23 14:04, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RPG stuff

There is a fair amount of information about the CIA in the RPG. I have made some changes to the article alluding to this. Unfortunately I don't have the books handy (they're in a box somewhere); I will try to dig them out and add some detail sometime in the next week or so.

The RPG itself is complete nonsense, though, and no one even seriously considers it canon. Just remember to source it properly so we can distinguish that info from the rest. --khaosworks 11:52, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)